The end of CITV...?

Agreed totally, to be honest if it was a perfect world Junk food wouldn't be bad for you or existed at all but we seem to have lasted around 45 years without any problems. It seems that since 2000 everyone seems to have swelled up.

The situation is that children are getting fatter. It doesn't matter if this has only began five years ago. It is hazardous. If there was adverts encouraging children to walk up to a clif and jump off the other side, there would be no question about it. It would be all very too well saying that the parents should have control over their children, and stop them from going. In my eyes, it is wrong that children are being encouraged to be naughty, by little smiley characters, resembling the smiley children's t.v. characters. All I can see is children with a fatal health problem, and if it helps fro the children not to be hell-bented to wanting it by their television sets, what would be wrong with it.

Also, I don't think that it would be a road down to nanny-state. There ahs always been different rules for children (minors) and adults since Victorian times. Too me it is just protecting children from adverts for things that arn't children's products. It is totally unsuitable, and inappropriate to target children, because they are more-likely to eat junk food if when they are adults if they start as children. Junk-food advertising can deliberatelty exploit vulnerablity. There is nothing 'nanny-ish' to me about protecting children from unsuitable messages.

What is different between injury adverts. Why wouldn't that be 'nanny-state'?

It's partly because of the compensation culture, litigious society that children are getting fatter. They are not being allowed to run around and play imaginatively any more because people are worried about getting sued. And more children are being driven to school - often unnecessarily, when the school is within practical walking distance.

And let's not forget the National Curriculum. Increasingly prescriptive school syllabuses mean less time is available for PE, while school playing fields are being sold off in their thousands.

If McDonalds is solely to blame for the rise in childhood obesity, then our honourable government is looking for a scapegoat for policies which have reduced opportunities for children to exercise and made it easier for their parents to sue when their little darlings fall off a climbing frame! McDonalds is not blameless, but there's a bigger picture.

i agree with that entirely, however not all sueings are for greed. Often it is literally so that they have the money for treatment of any long-term injuries.

But a lot of suings ARE for greed. There is one episode of Holby City that sticks out when a pair of chavs (Les and Cilla-types) were trying to get compensation out of the hospital by claiming its doctors caused a deterioration in the husband's heart condition. All that concerned this couple were the riches, but Connie found medical evidence to invalidate their accusations.

I still agree with you. I think 'health and saftey laws' can be hazardous, because peopel end up not doing activities that are extremely necessary, which is murch more unsafe than not doing it, because out of all the places to fall, one might fall on the small little spike, that makes up one-one-millionth of the room. It actually really irritates me. Infact extrmelly irritates me.

I just wanted to piont out that there are legitmate cases.

Monkey see monkey do as far as I'm concerned as children will copy their parents naturally and will eat un-healthily if they do and vice versa.

I find it incredible that people always seem to want to place the sole blame on a certain corporation for some ills which might have affected society.

Whilst Mcdonalds may be one simple factor in the increase of childhood obesity, they should not be taking the pilloying that it gets, especially from certain sections of the press/public. What people have to realise that in the commercial world in which we live in, there is choice.

No one forces you to go into Mcdonalds and purchase burgers, fries and a supersize coke every day of the week, day in day out for brekkie, lucnh and dinner. Advertising is also another factor, but at the end of the day parents are have power over what their children do in their formative years and should say no to a child, even if it upsets them.

We seem to have litte time for kids these days because of ever increasing financial pressures, and it is a shame to see both parents work all day every day and only get to see their little darlings for an hour or two in the evening and then stick on a ready meal or some other E-number infested crap from the freezer for them rather than taking the time and cooking from fresh. We're seeing a shift in society from the 'olden days' where one parent could afford to stay at home and look after the children to one where children become secondary to parents' employment.

Of course, it's not the probelm that the quality's gone up the spout, no way is it that.

Ultimately, who is to blame? Not advertisers as they are there to make people buy, just like a shop window does. The businesses- possibly in a big way via the CBI. The biggest problem is the government - doesn't matter whether its Labour, Tories/Conservatives, Whigs/LibDems - as they rely too much on the CBI to advise them on how business should be run in this country. The business' reduce workforce, increase the amount of work but more pressure on the workers left whilst keeping costs (oops I mean wages) whilst the price of goods, housing etc goes wildy up. Therefore people are having to work longer (i.e. either breaking European law saying that for most industries 48 work hours in a week is the most for anyon person, or signing out of the law therefore being able to work as many hours as possible, and many businesses actually get their employees to sign the contact which actually signs them out of the European Law protection!), for money to live and survive.

What a pitiful country we live in and its ALL politicians and the very greedy businesses in this country (whether based here or not) that have spoilt this great land and made it one big workhouse. No time for families, no time for fun and no time to live.

Don't blame the advertisers, dont blame parents and most of all don't blame children. Blame the laws in this land that have created a greedy society. This isn't capitalism if has far extended it from that. And who created the laws with the help of the CBI????

THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT CiTV!

Sorry,but I just think it's not really on topic.

well it is kind of still on topic as its about the possible ending of CiTV on ITV1. As you may know most braodcasters are saying that if a ban on fast food adverts come into effect then they will lose millions. But the synopsis has moved on to suggest as to whether it will be the ban on fast food that ends Citv on ITV1, then moved on to whether we are becoming a nany state to who is to blame for the situation this country is in.

Thus there is a correlation between the latest part of the discussion to the ending of CiTV on ITV1. In other words it all boils down to politics whether its internal ITV politics or external politics. All theories so far are viable.

But I do see your point and should get this thread back on line.

Less than a year ago it was 1 hr 45 minutes a day (Monday to Friday), 2 hours (excluding CD:UK) on Saturdays and about 1 hour on Sunday. which meant there was 11hrs and 45 mins of children's programming.

This week there is 1 hour a day (Monda to Friday) and about 30 mins on Sunday thus meaning there is only 5 hours and 30 mins of children's programming. i.e. the cut has more than halved.

Sky has about 3 hours a day Monday to Friday and between 4 and 5 hours at weekend equating to 24 hours in a week and yet Sky has no PSB contract and yet still manages to show almost 20 hours more children's programming than sky. This just shows how useless ITV are!!!!! Even "five" has about 22 hours of children's programming a week!!!

Who will win long term, both five and Sky because of brand loyalty from childhood. ITV will eventually lose most of its customer/viewer base because they are not allowing the brand to grow from pre-school to children's to adult.